Toxinhttp://desmogblog.com/taxonomy/term/8890/all
enNew Short Film Exposes The Human Cost Of Coal Ash Dumpinghttp://desmogblog.com/2014/10/22/new-short-film-exposes-human-cost-coal-ash-dumping
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/coal%20ash%20site.jpg?itok=KDQ2_FUc" width="200" height="116" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>The threats posed by coal ash are <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/11/09/epa-and-tva-nix-coal-ash-spill-cleanup-efforts">well known today</a>, but not too long ago, the dangers of coal ash disposal were a dirty energy secret.</p>
<p>For a large section of residents in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, the dangers of coal ash were kept a secret, and in their place the dirty energy industry fed them promises of a luscious, green and blue landscape that they could enjoy with their families. All they had to do was sign off on a coal ash dump in their area.</p>
<p>The energy company was First Energy, and a new short film by EarthJustice exposes the lies and the resulting impacts that their coal ash dump had on local communities.</p>
<p>The whole film, titled “Little Blue: A Broken Promise,” can <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iwD5J7GX58">be viewed here</a>:</p>
<p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="320" scrolling="no" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/4iwD5J7GX58" width="560"></iframe></p>
<!--break-->
<p>The story in the film is saddening and infuriating. Coal representatives were sent door-to-door in areas of West Virginia and Pennsylvania, where they made outlandish promises to citizens. Residents near Little Blue stream were promised by First Energy that a nearby coal ash disposal site would form a concrete-like barrier in the earth, creating a beautiful lake that residents would be able to use at their leisure.</p>
<p>Almost immediately after the company began dumping coal ash at the disposal site, residents noticed strange smells, breathing problems, and a strange color in the stream.</p>
<p>Like <a href="http://earthjustice.org/features/the-coal-ash-problem">most other communities with coal ash dumps</a>, the ones in the film are middle to lower income neighborhoods. This is a common practice among the dirty energy industry. <a href="http://earthjustice.org/features/coal-ash-contaminated-sites">EarthJustice has a website</a> available that tracks both operating and retired coal ash disposal sites, and which ones have been verified to have contaminated the local environment.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4406">coal ash</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6194">Fly Ash</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13387">dump</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6750">Disposal</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6751">Site</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5421">contamination</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8890">Toxin</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2625">pennsylvania</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3035">west virginia</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14729">First Energy</a></div></div></div>Wed, 22 Oct 2014 20:00:00 +0000Farron Cousins8662 at http://desmogblog.comReport Details Coal Industry's Pollution of Waterways, Political Systemhttp://desmogblog.com/2013/07/23/report-details-coal-industry-s-pollution-waterways-political-system
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/coal%20dumping%20water.jpg?itok=LU1VwT2M" width="200" height="139" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><a href="http://action.sierraclub.org/site/DocServer/ClosingTheFloodgates-Final.pdf">According to a new report</a>, the coal industry’s pollution is contaminating our water supplies, our regulatory agencies, and even our political process. The report, a joint project by the Waterkeeper Alliance, Clean Water Action, the Sierra Club, Earthjustice, and the Environmental Integrity Project, shows that when it comes to spewing toxic chemicals into our waterways, the coal industry is public enemy number one.</p>
<p>The report found that many coal plants across the country are releasing <a href="http://www.nrdc.org/energy/coalwaste/methodology.asp">coal ash waste and scrubber waste</a> without any federal oversight, and many are held to standards that are outdated and virtually limitless. Many of the standards currently in place were written more than 30 years ago, and they do not include any regulations on toxic threats that had not yet been identified at the time the original rules were put in place.</p>
<p>A few highlights of the report, <a href="https://content.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2013/07/new-report-highlights-extent-coal-plant-water-pollution-omb-obstruction">from the Sierra Club</a>:</p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in;">Of the 274 coal plants that discharge coal ash and scrubber wastewater into waterways, nearly 70 percent (188) have no limits on the toxics most commonly found in these discharges (arsenic, boron, cadmium, lead, mercury, and selenium) that are dumped directly into rivers, lakes, streams and bays.</p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in;">Of these 274 coal plants, more than one-third (102) have no requirements to monitor or report discharges of these toxic metals to government agencies or the public.</p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in;">A total of 71 coal plants surveyed discharge toxic water pollution into rivers, lakes, streams and bays that have already been declared impaired due to poor water quality. Of these plants that are dumping toxic metals into impaired waterways, more than three out of four coal plants (59) have no permit that limits the amount of toxic metals it can dump.</p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in;">Nearly half of the coal plants surveyed (187) are operating with an expired Clean Water Act permit. 53 of these power plants are operating with permits that expired five or more years ago.</p>
<!--break-->
<p>Specific dangers arise with each of the toxic chemicals listed above. The most troubling are arsenic and lead, two heavy metals that are toxic to both humans and animals. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heavy_metals_and_coal">Neither of these metals deteriorates over time</a>, and once they enter the body, they are not expelled.</p>
<p>Mercury has been <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heavy_metals_and_coal">linked to impaired fetal development and diminished cognitive functioning</a> and development, presenting a particularly dire situation for women who are pregnant or nursing.</p>
<p>Since we know the dangers associated with these toxic coal waste components, it is only fitting to question why our federal regulatory agencies would allow the coal industry to continue to dump this waste into our waterways. <a href="http://action.sierraclub.org/site/DocServer/ClosingTheFloodgates-Final.pdf">The answer is provided in the report</a>: Industry influence.</p>
<p>The White House Office of Management and Budget (<span class="caps">OMB</span>) was prepared to crack down on the dumping of toxic coal waste, but once the final rules were written, <a href="https://content.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2013/07/new-report-highlights-extent-coal-plant-water-pollution-omb-obstruction">the <span class="caps">OMB</span> caved to industry pressure</a> and pulled back on standards that would have protected human health and the environment.</p>
<p>Abigail Dillen, Earthjustice’s Climate <span class="amp">&amp;</span> Energy Vice President, says that the <a href="http://content.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2013/07/new-report-highlights-extent-coal-plant-water-pollution-omb-obstruction">industry was allowed to meet behind closed doors</a> with federal regulators to help draft new, weaker standards for the industry. This appears to be par for the course for the Obama administration, which has allowed the coal industry to have <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/coal-lobbyist-grinches-stole-2010-obama-transparency-initiative-falters">personal audience with high-ranking government officials on countless issues</a>.</p>
<p>The solution to the problem is to strengthen the Clean Water Act to outlaw the dangerous behavior of the coal industry. If they are allowed to continue dumping toxic waste into the environment, the cumulative effect is going to become worse and worse for future generations. <br /><br />
The only problem is that we need an administration willing to stand up to the interests of the coal lobby in favor of the interests of the American public. President Obama has yet to rise to the challenge.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4406">coal ash</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13269">Scrubber</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6280">Waste</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5648">Report</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8890">Toxin</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6192">Toxic</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6550">arsenic</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6697">Mercury</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5852">Lead</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6180">water</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6698">Poison</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5689">Lobby</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6383">Government</a></div></div></div>Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:27:23 +0000Farron Cousins7349 at http://desmogblog.comFederal Study Reignites Pollution Concern in Expanding Tar Sands Region http://desmog.ca/2013/01/18/federal-study-reignites-pollution-concern-expanding-tar-sands-region
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/tar%20sands%20emissions.jpg?itok=K7KKLlNa" width="200" height="133" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Dr. David Schindler, the scientist who sounded the alarm on <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/107/37/16178.long">tar sands contamination back in 2010</a>, has suddenly found his research backed by an <a href="http://thetyee.ca/News/2013/01/07/Kurek-et-al-Athabasca-Oil-Sands-Legacy.pdf">Environment Canada study</a> recently published in the prestigious journal <em><a href="http://www.pnas.org/">Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences</a></em>. The <a href="http://thetyee.ca/News/2013/01/07/Kurek-et-al-Athabasca-Oil-Sands-Legacy.pdf">federal study</a>, which confirmed Schindler’s hotly-contested research, has reignited concerns over the pace and scale of development in the Athabasca region, an area now beset with a host of ecological and human health concerns. </p>
<!--break-->
<div>
Environment Canada scientists Jane Kirk, David Muir and Joanne Parrott confirmed Schindler’s conclusion that hydrocarbon-derived contaminants, known as <a href="http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/wastemin/minimize/factshts/pahs.pdf">polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons</a> (<span class="caps">PAH</span>s), have polluted the landscape surrounding tar sands operations. The new study found high concentrations of <span class="caps">PAH</span>s in areas <a href="http://thetyee.ca/News/2013/01/07/Kurek-et-al-Athabasca-Oil-Sands-Legacy.pdf">more than 100 kilometers away from Fort McMurray</a>, an area dominated with open-pit mines and bitumen refineries. </div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/kk/8382801968/in/photostream"><img alt="" src="/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/tar%20sands%20photo.jpg" style="width: 600px; height: 349px; " /></a></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size:9px;">In early 2012 DeSmog traveled to Fort McMurray with <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/kk/8382801968/in/photostream">photographer Kris Krug</a>. This image, taken of refineries that border the area's open pit mines, shows only a fraction of the impact industrial development has had on the surrounding landscape. </span></div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
The <a href="http://thetyee.ca/News/2013/01/07/Kurek-et-al-Athabasca-Oil-Sands-Legacy.pdf">new study</a> draws upon <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/107/37/16178.long">Schindler’s discovery</a> that snowfall plays a pivotal role in the transport of <span class="caps">PAH</span>s and other toxins throughout the landscape and into waterways. Laboratory testing showed snow melt from the area is <a href="http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/Federal+scientists+uncover+evidence+that+oilsands+contaminants+travel+further+than+expected/7542920/story.html#ixzz2C9pE0cF6">fatal to young minnows</a>.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Dr. Schindler told DeSmog that what the research really demonstrates is the extent to which industry and government have failed to monitor – and mitigate – the negative environmental affects of tar sands development.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
“Both background studies and environmental impact assessments have been shoddy, and could not really even be called science,” he said. “This must change.”</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
If there is a hint of frustration in Schindler’s candid remarks on the topic, it isn’t without warrant. In 2010, after the release of his <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/107/37/16178.long">original research</a> on tar sands pollution, the <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/08/30/us-oilsands-environment-idUSTRE67T3H920100830">Alberta government accused him of scientific bias</a>, calling the legitimacy of his research and his professional credibility into question. The provincial government at the time stood firmly by the line that any present contamination in the watershed was <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2010/08/31/oilsands-ramp-kuzmic.html">naturally occurring</a>.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
When asked if management of the tar sands has been based on sound science, Schindler’s answer is definitive: “No.” Both industry and government, he says, have failed to monitor the environmental impact of bitumen mining and production. </div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
“Monitoring studies by <span class="caps">RAMP</span> [<a href="http://www.ramp-alberta.org/RAMP.aspx">Regional Aquatics Monitoring Program</a>] and Alberta Environment have been poorly done, according to recent panel reports.” </div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
“The studies that have been done have been very poor, using poor statistical design, inadequate sampling, and chemical methods with poor limits of detection.” </div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Because of this, says Schindler, local wildlife is suffering. “<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/09/29/death-woods-canadian-federal-government-delays-release-caribou-recovery-strategy-again">Caribou are in decline</a>, and probably not recoverable. Many predatory mammals and boreal song birds are also in decline.” </div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Numerous reports of <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/story/2012/06/01/edmonton-deformed-fish-lake-athabasca.html">deformed fish</a> in waterways downstream of tar sands operations, most notably in <a href="http://www.woodbuffalo.ab.ca/living_2227/Communities/Fort-Chipewyan.htm">Fort Chipewyan</a>, may also be related, says Schindler.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
“Earlier studies by Environment Canada and Queen’s University scientists showed that fish eggs hatched on bitumen contaminated sediments had high mortalities, and that the few survivors had malformations, which were described as like those observed in adult fish caught near Fort Chipewyan.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
“When contaminated snow melts and runs off, it is toxic. I think a connection is very probable.”</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Schindler says similar malformations have occurred downstream of other polluted areas in the Great Lakes Basin and known Superfund sites. </div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Fort Chipewyan also suffers from elevated rates of cancer. Schindler says the link between the poor health of local communities and oil production is impossible to make “without considerable further study.” He adds: “The most likely carcinogens are some of the poorly studied polycyclic aromatic compounds.”</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
The need for health studies in the region is crucial, according to Schindler, and also long-overdue.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
“A health study of Fort Chipewyan was recommended in the final report of the Northern River Basins study in 1996, and it has still not been done.”</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<span style="font-size:9px;"><em>Photos used with permisson of <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/kk/8382801968/in/photostream">Kris Krug</a>.</em></span></div>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2738">oilsands</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/oil-sands">oil sands</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2632">tar sands</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5421">contamination</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10998">polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10997">PAHs</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8890">Toxin</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10994">deformed fish</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6102">Fort Chipewyan</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5373">David Schindler</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/environment-canada">Environment Canada</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11567">Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6818">Athabasca River</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11002">Jane Kirk</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11162">David Muir</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11003">Joanne Parrott</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7371">Fort McMurray</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5538">bitumen</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10933">RAMP</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1165">Alberta</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11568">carcinogens</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6144">Cancer</a></div></div></div>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 13:00:00 +0000Carol Linnitt6797 at http://desmogblog.comEPA And TVA Nix Coal Ash Spill Cleanup Effortshttp://desmogblog.com/2012/11/09/epa-and-tva-nix-coal-ash-spill-cleanup-efforts
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/TennesseeCoalAshSpill1.jpg?itok=ZISRtZmg" width="200" height="133" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Four years after a coal processing plant operated by the Tennessee Valley Authority (<span class="caps">TVA</span>)<a href="http://desmogblog.com/massive-coal-ash-spill-tennessee-puts-lie-clean-coal"> accidentally released tons of toxic coal ash</a> into waterways in Kingston, the cleanup has finally come to an end. </p>
<p>But just because cleanup efforts have ceased, that does not mean that the pollution problem is gone.</p>
<p>In fact, quite the opposite is true. The <span class="caps">U.S.</span> Environmental Protection Agency (<span class="caps">EPA</span>) has <a href="http://www.wate.com/story/20048235/residents-satisfied-with-tvas-plan-for-coal-ash-cleanup">reached a deal with the <span class="caps">TVA</span></a> to allow the company to stop their cleanup efforts and allow “<a href="http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2012/nov/07/tva-plans-natural-recovery-coal-ash-kingston-river/?breakingnews">natural river processes</a>” to dispose of the remaining toxic sludge.</p>
<!--break-->
<p><a href="http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/85c4ad8eceef45ed865bde870cef2de4/TN--Coal-Ash-Spill">Reports say that as much as 500,000 cubic yards of coal ash sludge</a> remain in the Emory River, a result of the 2008 dam rupture that released the coal ash from the processing plant. According to the <span class="caps">EPA</span> and <span class="caps">TVA</span>, it's perfectly fine to allow those contaminants to remain in the river. As the <span class="caps">EPA</span> puts it, dredging up the remaining coal ash would actually release even more pollutants into the water – including contaminants left over from previous industrial accidents and Department of Energy projects. </p>
<p>To put it more succinctly: The “leave it lie” mindset occurred in the past, making it impossible to clean up current spills without disturbing previous contaminants that weren’t cleaned. Pollution will now be left piled on top of other pollution, and so on and so on.</p>
<p>To make matters even worse, the industry and <span class="caps">EPA</span> <a href="http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/85c4ad8eceef45ed865bde870cef2de4/TN--Coal-Ash-Spill">managed to convince residents of Kingston and Roane County</a> that this is the best solution at a town hall meeting on the subject Thursday night.</p>
<p>The residents have lost the battle, and the <span class="caps">TVA</span> emerged as the clear winner in their own disaster. Had the <span class="caps">EPA</span> forced <span class="caps">TVA</span> to clean up the entire spill, the company would have <a href="http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2012/nov/07/tva-plans-natural-recovery-coal-ash-kingston-river/?breakingnews">paid nearly $180 million</a> for the efforts. Instead, they get to “monitor” the natural river processes for the next few decades, at an <a href="http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2012/nov/07/tva-plans-natural-recovery-coal-ash-kingston-river/?breakingnews">estimated cost of $10 million</a>. That’s a savings for the <span class="caps">TVA</span> of more than 90%.</p>
<p>While the blame for the actual spill rests upon the shoulders of the <span class="caps">TVA</span>, the <span class="caps">EPA</span> has put itself in a position now where they can share a part of the blame for the faltering clean up efforts. Over the last few years, the <span class="caps">EPA</span> has been reluctant to issue any form of ruling on the <a href="http://desmogblog.com/coal-ash-ponds-contaminating-groundwater-tennessee">toxicity of coal ash</a>, instead opting to hold <a href="http://desmogblog.com/us-epa-coal-ash-hearings-intensify-tennessee-hearing-added-following-controversy">town hall meetings to get input</a> from <span class="caps">U.S.</span> citizens that have been <a href="http://desmogblog.com/alec-s-vision-pre-empting-epa-coal-ash-regs-passes-house">hit with a barrage</a> of <a href="http://desmogblog.com/coal-lobbyists-wooed-white-house-staff-influence-coal-ash-regulations-long-public-hearings">misinformation from the dirty energy industry</a> on coal ash. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://desmogblog.com/coal-ash-ponds-contaminating-groundwater-tennessee">dangers of coal ash</a> are well documented. And the decision to allow this sludge to remain in the Emory River, which is the result of poor decision-making during past environmental catastrophes, shows why it is of utmost importance to prevent future spills. The next time this happens, and under current circumstances that is incredibly likely, it will just be adding more pollutants to the mix, and they’ll sit in the river and wait for the next spill to add to the pile. </p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6192">Toxic</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4406">coal ash</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7628">Plan</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6931">TVA</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/epa">EPA</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6683">Ruling</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7513">Cleanup</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8890">Toxin</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10950">Kingston</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10951">River</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10952">Roane County</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1848">Tennessee</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6144">Cancer</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2247">lobbying</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3632">lobbyist</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7148">Misinformation</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6232">Spill</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10222">Accident</a></div></div></div>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 16:55:55 +0000Farron Cousins6647 at http://desmogblog.comShrinking Arctic Ice May Cause Mercury Poisoninghttp://desmogblog.com/shrinking-arctic-ice-may-cause-mercury-poisoning
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/Arctic-MultiYear-Ice-1980-150x150%20%281%29.jpg?itok=2TafuoIq" alt="Arctic ice cap shrinkage over 32 years" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><span class="caps">NASA</span> has shown repeatedly that the Actic icecap is melting, and melting faster than climate models predict. This <a href="http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/thick-melt.html">new visualization</a> is stark and should be of obvious concern, simply because of the impact on sea levels. Now there is a potentially new threat. The process of shrinkage may cause a chemical reaction that could poison the Arctic ecosystem with mercury.</p>
<p>The disappearance of old, thick ice in the Arctic means an increase in bromine released into the atmosphere. The new, thinner ice has more salt and this is where the bromine comes from. As it melts it interacts with relatively benign gaseous mercury causing it to solidify and fall in a toxic form to the ground and into ocean water. The old old ice has less salt.</p>
<p><img alt="Image source: NASA" src="/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Arctic-MultiYear-Ice-1980.jpg" style="width: 550px; height: 674px; " /></p>
<p>it is currently popular in denier circles to tout the April 2012 ice sheet extension as a sign of slowing of Arctic ice melt. This grasping at straws is not supported by the overall data, which shows <a href="http://ksjtracker.mit.edu/2012/03/05/icemelt-news-part-ii-arctic-sea-ice-less-volume-more-bromine-and-maybe-a-mercury-peril/">Acrtic ice disappearance increasing</a>. The April extent is mainly thinner, new ice that will easily melt, potentially causing the “bromine explosiion” <a href="http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2012/mar/HQ_12-064_Arctic_Bromine.html">described by <span class="caps">NASA</span></a>. The old, thicker icecap is shrinking more rapidly as time passes, and with it, the benign melting of salt-depleted ice.</p>
<!--break--></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4511">ice</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6192">Toxic</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6697">Mercury</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8890">Toxin</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9258">acrtic</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9259">melt</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9260">bromine</a></div></div></div>Sat, 26 May 2012 19:00:00 +0000Evan Leeson6336 at http://desmogblog.comCoal Ash Sites Posing Increasing Dangers To Water Supplies, Public Healthhttp://desmogblog.com/coal-ash-sites-posing-increasing-dangers-water-supplies-public-health
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/toxins-in-water.jpg?itok=gaKZ0peA" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>The <a href="http://www.environmentalintegrity.org/news_reports/04_27_2012.php">Environmental Integrity Project</a> (<span class="caps">EIP</span>) has once again put together a fantastic report regarding water contamination near coal ash disposal sites.<br /><br />
Last year, the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/coal-ash-disposal-sites-contaminating-ground-water-19-states"><span class="caps">EIP</span> released</a> <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/report-arsenic-coal-ash-disposal-sites-leaching-groundwater">several reports</a> showing that drinking water near coal ash disposal sites in states across America contained dangerous levels of heavy metals and other toxins, including arsenic. In total, last year’s report revealed 53 sites in the United States where coal ash had polluted drinking water supplies.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.environmentalintegrity.org/news_reports/documents/20120426_Final_ICRDataReport.pdf">The new report has identified a total of 116 coal ash sites</a> in America that are leaching deadly toxins into the environment.<br /><br />
The new <span class="caps">EIP</span> report resulted from a Freedom of Information Act (<span class="caps">FOIA</span>) request to the <span class="caps">EPA</span>, which revealed that 49 different coal-fired power plants acknowledged that their own testing showed that groundwater pollution around their disposal sites far exceeded the federally acceptable levels. <a href="http://www.environmentalintegrity.org/news_reports/documents/20120426_Final_ICRDataReport.pdf">Among the chemicals reported to exceed federal standards</a> at the coal-fired plants’ disposal sites are:<br /> </p>
<!--break-->
<blockquote>
Arsenic (a potent carcinogen) at no fewer than 22 plants<br /><br />
Manganese (a metal that can damage the nervous system in high concentrations) at 22<br /><br />
Boron (a pollutant that can cause damage to the stomach, intestines, liver, kidney, and brain when ingested in large amounts) at 12<br /><br />
Selenium (a toxic pollutant that causes adverse health effects at high exposures) at 13<br /><br />
Cadmium (a toxic pollutant that can damage the kidneys, lungs, and bones) at 10.<br />
</blockquote>
<p>From an <a href="http://www.environmentalintegrity.org/news_reports/documents/042612EIPCoalAshContaminationReportnewsrelease_Final.pdf"><span class="caps">EIP</span> press release</a>:<br /> </p>
<blockquote>
The information was originally requested by the <span class="caps">USEPA</span> Office of Water to help the agency evaluate the potential toxicity of wastewater containing ash or scrubber sludge that may be discharged to rivers or lakes. Forty two of the 91 coal-fired plants surveyed by <span class="caps">EPA</span> either did not respond, had no groundwater monitoring data, reported that available monitoring did not indicate that any standards had been exceeded, or claimed confidentiality.<br /><br />
Plants responding to <span class="caps">EPA</span>’s survey may be measuring some, but not all, contaminants subject to health-based standards, and lack of uniform monitoring standards for coal ash disposal sites means that methods of detection and measurement vary from state to state.<br />
</blockquote>
<p>This new report <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/alec-s-vision-pre-empting-epa-coal-ash-regs-passes-house">comes on the heels of a vote in the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> House of Representatives</a> on an amendment to the Surface Transportation Act of 2012 that would prohibit the <span class="caps">EPA</span> from regulating coal ash. That amendment was put forward by <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/gop-coal-ash-bill-may-be-hazardous-your-health">Representative David McKinley</a>, a Republican from West Virginia. To understand McKinley’s motives, here’s a snippet from last year’s “<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/year-dirty-energy-coal">Year In Dirty Energy: Coal</a>” report:<br /> </p>
<blockquote>
Republican Representative David McKinley from West Virginia has <a href="http://www.congressweb.com/cweb2/index.cfm/siteid/TDL/action/TakeAction.Background/LetterGroupID/5">proposed a bill</a> that would prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency (<span class="caps">EPA</span>) from regulating toxic coal ash. The <span class="caps">EPA</span> has not yet made a decision on whether or not to classify coal ash as toxic, but reports show that the substance poses significant risks to human health.<br /><br />
But after looking into <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=Career&amp;cid=N00031681&amp;type=I">McKinley’s campaign coffers</a>, it is no surprise that he is fighting tooth and nail to prevent coal ash from being labeled as toxic. He has received more than $83,000 from the mining industry – the single largest industry to donate to his campaign. But it isn’t just the mining industry that has put money behind McKinley – <a href="http://www.campaignmoney.org/press-room/2011/04/25/rep-mckinley-raked-big-cash">big oil got in on the game as well</a>. Exxon Mobil put $8,000 in his pockets, and the Koch brothers threw in another $10,000. An interesting note about this freshman Congressman – 66% of his campaign contributions came from out of state. Not bad for a man who had never held a federal office before.<br />
</blockquote>
<p>Unfortunately for the folks in West Virginia who voted for McKinley, they have at least five coal ash disposal sites that are contaminating local groundwater supplies with toxic chemicals. And if politicians like David McKinley have their way, these sites will soon be out of the regulatory reach of the <span class="caps">EPA</span>, opening the door for a lot more coal ash pollution problems.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/epa">EPA</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/republican">republican</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/640">exxon</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/662">coal</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2176">foia</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3035">west virginia</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4406">coal ash</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5200">Environmental Integrity Project</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6427">David McKinley</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6550">arsenic</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6697">Mercury</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7897">EIP</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8031">Ash</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8890">Toxin</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8916">water pollution</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9006">Cadmium</a></div></div></div>Fri, 27 Apr 2012 19:55:56 +0000Farron Cousins6231 at http://desmogblog.comThe State Of The Gulf Two Years After Deepwater Horizon Disasterhttp://desmogblog.com/state-gulf-two-years-after-deepwater-horizon-disaster
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/bp-logo-oil_0.jpg?itok=6Gnz3JAo" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Today marks the two-year anniversary of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion that killed 11 rig workers and subsequently caused an oil geyser in the Gulf of Mexico that <a href="http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2012/04/bp_oil_spill_probe_is_being_hi.html">leaked hundreds of millions of gallons</a> of crude oil into the water. The mainstream press will provide coverage over the next few days, reminding the world that the Gulf Coast is still reeling from the effects of the disaster. But for <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rocky-kistner/stories-from-the-gulf-rev_b_1435230.html?ref=green">those of us that call the coast home</a>, we’re reminded of what’s happened everyday.<br /><br />
A lot has happened in the two years since the rig explosion – <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/what-was-missing-oil-spill-commissions-report">federal inquiries</a>, <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/deadly-bacteria-found-gulf-coast-tar-balls">scientific testing</a>, <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/transocean-report-blames-bp-gulf-oil-disaster?utm_source=twitterfeed&amp;utm_medium=twitter">corporate investigations</a>. These actions have told us two very important things: The first being that the explosion and oil leak <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/what-we-didn-t-learn-deepwater-horizon-disaster">could have easily been prevented</a> had the companies involved not cut corners. The second is that the oil is proving to be <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/deadly-bacteria-found-gulf-coast-tar-balls">much more harmful to the ecosystem</a> in the Gulf of Mexico than most people realize.<br /><br />
The most recent developments in the ongoing saga include rig owner Transocean once again attempted to thwart a thorough investigation into their role in the disaster.</p>
<!--break-->
<p><br />
Just last week, a government attorney representing the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> Chemical Safety Board – a group charged with the task of investigating industrial chemical accidents – <a href="http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2012/04/bp_oil_spill_probe_is_being_hi.html">argued before a federal judge</a> that Transocean was refusing to comply with subpoenas from the agency on information relating to the Deepwater Horizon rig explosion. The agency is not concerned with investigating the oil spill itself, but rather the actual rig explosion that killed 11 men.<br /><br />
They are unable to levy fines or issue arrests, they are only able to take the available evidence and make recommendations to companies in the future to try to prevent disasters like this from happening again. But in spite of the fact that they are not facing any form of legal reprimand from the group, Transocean continues to deny the subpoena requests.<br /><br />
One possible reason for the denial is that any evidence obtained by the agency could in turn be used in civil suits by plaintiffs and possibly even other government agencies. While it can’t be said for certain without the documents being released, those in the legal profession will tell you that if a company refuses to hand over documents, it is usually because they are hiding something.<br /><br />
And on the subject of lawsuits, <span class="caps">BP</span> recently <a href="http://bpbenzenelawsuit.com/news/details-of-medical-monitoring-aspects-of-bp-oil-spill-settlement-to-be-determined/">settled out of court</a> in the amount of $7.8 billion, to compensate loss of income to those affected by the oil, as well as what’s known as medical monitoring. Medical monitoring means that the company will continue to pay any claims related to the oil spill for people who have been sick, are sick, or could become sick in the future. Plaintiff’s lawyers have touted this measure as an enormous victory for those along the Gulf Coast.<br /><br />
And while positive gains are being made to make the people affected by the oil whole again, there have been almost no positive signs for the actual environment.<br /><br />
Scientists recently discovered that the tar balls that are still washing up on Gulf Coast beaches have been <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/deadly-bacteria-found-gulf-coast-tar-balls">found to contain bacteria</a> that has the potential to be life-threatening.<br /><br />
On top of that, new reports are surfacing on the effects that the lingering oil is having on marine life throughout the Gulf of Mexico. <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/18/gulf-seafood-deformities-raise-questions_n_1434268.html?ref=green">Fishermen are reporting</a> catching shrimp with no eyes and other mutated forms of sealife being hauled in with their daily catch.<br /><br />
Despite these deformities, <a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/04/201241682318260912.html">the <span class="caps">FDA</span> (and industry) continues to tell Americans</a> that the seafood from the Gulf of Mexico is completely safe.<br /><br />
The concern about seafood and environmental safety is not just coming from worries over the oil, but also from worries over the dispersants that were poured on top of the oil to make it clump and sink to the bottom. The concerns are not just relegated to seafood, but also to human health. <a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/04/201241682318260912.html">As Al Jazeera reports</a>:<br /> </p>
<blockquote>
Pathways of exposure to the dispersants are inhalation, ingestion, skin, and eye contact. Health impacts can include headaches, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pains, chest pains, respiratory system damage, skin sensitisation, hypertension, central nervous system depression, neurotoxic effects, cardiac arrhythmia and cardiovascular damage. They are also teratogenic - able to disturb the growth and development of an embryo or fetus - and carcinogenic.<br />
</blockquote>
<p>If there is one positive to come out of the event, it's that the oil geyser helped wake people up along the Gulf Coast to the dangers posed by drilling, and general environmental degradation. <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120412105227.htm">A full 25% of those polled recently</a> along the Gulf Coast said that the disaster had changed their views on oil drilling, as well as made them more aware and more accepting of climate change and its threat to the planet.<br /><br />
In the past two years, I have written quite a bit about the Deepwater Horizon disaster, not only because it was a massive environmental disaster, but because I have lived along the Gulf Coast for nearly my entire life. I was born here, and currently call this area home.<br /><br />
I grew up playing in the sugar white sands of Pensacola Beach, and had hoped that my young children would be able to do the same. While I didn’t suffer any financial loss, or the loss of a loved one from the disaster, I did lose a part of my childhood when the oil began washing up on our shores.<br /><br />
I will conclude with a video that we produced shortly after the oil disaster that really captured the mood of those of us along the coast. It's called “<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-heDWycOuYM">Cries from the Gulf</a>.” And while the national media will pay homage to the Gulf Coast for the next few days and then move onto other stories, rest assured, the cries from the Gulf have not subsided – it's just that people stopped listening.<br /><br /><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/-heDWycOuYM" width="480"></iframe></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/science">Science</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1002">bp</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1286">oil</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3637">Halliburton</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5004">transocean</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5007">gulf coast</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5014">deepwater horizon</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5087">Gulf of Mexico</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6232">Spill</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6382">Anniversary</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7339">FDA</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8321">Tar Ball</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8889">Cries From the Gulf</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8890">Toxin</a></div></div></div>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 12:45:00 +0000Farron Cousins6212 at http://desmogblog.com